by Ephraim Silverberg

The dispute of Korach did not arise in a vacuum. The Seder Olam places it after the incident of the spies — and this timing is not incidental. Both the spies and Korach reasoned from the same premise: that spiritual elevation trumps earthly action. The spies wanted to remain in the desert, sustained by manna and the Clouds of Glory, and avoid the physical labor of Eretz Yisrael. Korach took this logic one step further: if physical deeds are what matter, then all of Israel stands equal — and Moshe's singular kingship is unjustified. Both were wrong. This Dvar Torah, based on a teaching by the Lubavitcher Rebbe from Shabbat of Korach, 5722 (1962), traces why — and reveals what it means for deeds to truly illuminate.

The Timing of Korach's Dispute

It is stated in Seder Olam that Korach's dispute occurred after the incident with the spies. It must be understood why Korach waited until then, since the appointment of Aharon and his sons to the Kehuna occurred long before (on the 6th of Sivan of the previous year, or on the 23rd of Adar, as opposed to after the 9th of Av). Even if we say that the main dispute of Korach concerned the appointment of Elizaphan ben Uziel as Prince of the sons of Kehat — this occurred at the time of the counting of the Levites (at the beginning of Iyar). It is therefore necessary to conclude that Korach's dispute is connected with the incident of the spies.

The Reasoning of the Spies Versus the Reasoning of Korach

As explained in Likutei Sichot on Parashat Shlach, the intent of the spies in refusing to enter Eretz Yisrael was to allow Bnei Yisrael to continue their supernatural existence — manna from heaven, water from the well of Miriam, the protection of the Clouds of Glory — and thereby to cleave to Hashem on a high spiritual level. Their error was that they did not realize that HaMaaseh Hu HaIkar — physical deeds are predominant over spiritual intentions — and that only by performing the physical Mitzvot in Eretz Yisrael under natural conditions could the intention of creation be fulfilled.

Korach reasoned from this premise: true, Moshe and Aharon were on a far higher spiritual level than all of Israel — but in relation to the physical action of performing the Mitzvot, all of Israel were equal.

The Dispute of the 250 Princes

This reasoning solves a puzzling question: how could Korach and the 250 Princes ask, "...all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and Hashem is among them; why then do you raise yourselves above the assembly of Hashem?" (Numbers 16:3) — when they themselves were "Princes of the Assembly"? Surely they were not coming to negate their own position.

The answer is that the Princes were not disputing the essence of princeship itself, but the type of superiority that Moshe Rabbenu held — the level of a "king," whose relation to those he rules is one beyond all measure (ein aroch). They claimed: although there are gradations in the Jewish people, since physical deeds are more important than the spiritual contemplation accompanying them — and in physical action all of Israel are equal — there is no place for a level of kingship whose relation to the people is beyond bounds (as opposed to their own princeship, which stood in a ratio of 1000 to 1, 100 to 1, etc.).

Moshe's Answer

Moshe answered them: "In the morning, Hashem will show who are His, and who is holy, and will cause him to come near unto Him" (Numbers 16:5). Rashi offers two explanations for why Moshe made them wait until morning:

1. Perhaps they would do Teshuva in the meantime.

2. "Hashem has made boundaries in His world" — can you turn morning into evening? Similarly, you cannot abolish "And He separated Aharon to sanctify Him in the Holy of Holies" (I Chronicles 23:13).

Both explanations require clarification. As for the first: why did Moshe need to give them the whole night? Teshuva can be instantaneous — as with the sons of Korach — or, on the other hand, may not come for quite a while. As for the second: if the point was to distinguish night from day, it was sufficient to wait until evening. And furthermore: the burning of the incense the following morning demonstrated that the Kehuna Gedola belonged rightfully to Aharon — but what about the contention regarding Moshe's own leadership? How was that answered?

The Meaning of Good Deeds

The Ba'al HaTanya notes the expression "Teshuva and Maasim Tovim — good deeds," which recurs throughout the writings of the Sages, and explains: the performance of the Mitzvot may be done in a manner that is not "good" — that does not illuminate — even if the acts themselves still count as Mitzvot.

A parable: diamonds covered with filth. Not only do the diamonds not shine — they become a source of darkness and revulsion; their inner properties are hidden and encrusted. Similarly, the Mitzvot are designed to add light to this world. If one performs them for ulterior motives, this brings pride — which is the opposite of what a Mitzvah is. The very word mitzvah derives from tzavtah v'chibur — binding and attachment. Through a Mitzvah, a person is attached to Hashem; through pride and arrogance, he is cut off. As Hashem says of the proud person (Sota 5:1): "He and I cannot dwell together."

Moshe's Intention in His Answer

This was Moshe's answer to Korach and his cohorts: true, the actual deed is predominant — but the Mitzvot must be performed in the manner of "morning." They must illuminate, so that they bring about "Hashem will be made known" — the knowledge and revelation of G-dliness. It is possible to perform the Mitzvot without proper intention, but then they do not illuminate and they do not bring about the knowledge of G-dliness. This is hinted at in both of Rashi's explanations:

First: "Perhaps they will do Teshuva" — although Teshuva can be instantaneous, it must be an illuminating Teshuva, a "morning" Teshuva, so that the deeds that follow shall be "good." Teshuva from fear, though it forgives sin, still leaves a person sensing himself as a separate entity. The Teshuva must be from great love — Ahava Rabba — so that "intentional transgressions are considered as if they were merits."

Second: "Hashem has made boundaries in His world" — here Moshe hints at the advantage of illuminating Mitzvot over those that are not, through the parable of evening and morning. Both evening and morning are creations of Hashem, and together they constitute the "first day" — yet evening remains dark, and morning is light.

And here is the answer to "Why should you rule over us?" — true, "the entire congregation are all holy and Hashem is inside them." Every Jew is holy not only by virtue of his soul but by virtue of his body; through this holiness he has the power to draw down the Essence of Hashem into this world. But — since the Mitzvot must be illuminating, there is an infinite advantage to the Mitzvot of Moshe Rabbenu over those of the rest of Israel (see Tanya, chapter 42). It is therefore necessary to receive all divine influence from Moshe Rabbenu, and from his parallels in every generation — not only in the service of heart and mind, but also in the performance of Mitzvot — precisely so that they may be "good" deeds.

The Lesson for Our Divine Service

From the Parshiot of Shlach and Korach, we learn: some claim that the performance of Mitzvot is not central — that what matters is "what is in the heart." Others claim that performance alone is sufficient, without concentrating on the service of the heart (prayer) and the study of Chassidut. These two Parshiot show that both forms of divine service must be practiced together, in harmony. As the previous Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch, stressed: physical deed is predominant — but that deed must be refined and pure, and this refinement comes through the study of the inner Torah (Chassidut) and the service of prayer.

Through service in both directions, this world becomes a dwelling place for Hashem in two ways: as a dwelling for His Essence, and as a place where His Essence is revealed.

Shabbat Shalom.

Colophon

This Dvar Torah was written by Ephraim Silverberg ([email protected], at Technion/Haifa, posting via UC Berkeley) and shared on net.religion.jewish on June 25, 1985. It is, in Silverberg's words, "an English translation and condensation of a Hebrew translation of a Dvar Torah given by the Lubavitcher Rebbe (Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson) on the Shabbat of Korach in the year 5722 (1962 C.E.)." The author takes full responsibility for all errors in translation and interpretation. Original Message-ID: [email protected].

Preserved from the Usenet archive for the Good Work Library by the New Tianmu Anglican Church, 2026.

🌲